Forums

Calendar

Blogs

Reputation Activity

It's important to not just relegate religion to an abstract group of theological concepts. The focus of my work is to find the cosmic, then translate it into ethics, and then translate that into the practical. This is based on the Prophetic hadith, "Surely, knowledge is three: a firm sign, a just obligation, and an established Sunna."
Regarding my previous post: in my classroom, "respect words" is rule #1, written on chart paper. In addition to speaking the truth, maintaining your promises and thinking before you speak, I tell students that "respect words" means to not interrupt one another -- this would be equivalent to two different symphonies occurring at once.
I tell them to write their poetry in cursive with a nice pen, and not just any ballpoint pen. Allah made His creation beautiful, and He made it a sign of Him; so we should strive to make our words and writings beautiful as well.
Sometimes the kids need reminders, but they get it and they like it.

It's important to not just relegate religion to an abstract group of theological concepts. The focus of my work is to find the cosmic, then translate it into ethics, and then translate that into the practical. This is based on the Prophetic hadith, "Surely, knowledge is three: a firm sign, a just obligation, and an established Sunna."
Regarding my previous post: in my classroom, "respect words" is rule #1, written on chart paper. In addition to speaking the truth, maintaining your promises and thinking before you speak, I tell students that "respect words" means to not interrupt one another -- this would be equivalent to two different symphonies occurring at once.
I tell them to write their poetry in cursive with a nice pen, and not just any ballpoint pen. Allah made His creation beautiful, and He made it a sign of Him; so we should strive to make our words and writings beautiful as well.
Sometimes the kids need reminders, but they get it and they like it.

What's always struck me as interesting is how the Nation of Islam's prominence in the 20th century fuelled an image of an American Muslim as an ethical, virtuous figure who would abstain from the societal debauchery that exists around him (before this characterisation was reversed post-9/11). The NOI brought Islam to the forefront of American public consciousness for the first time, and its mission of giving Blacks respectability and a sense of purpose was the catalyst for Americans to formulate a notion of 'what' a Muslim was for the first time. To America in the '60's and 70's, a quintessential Muslim was Black, native-born, often a convert, and always socially-driven and self-disciplined. You can see examples of this in pop culture as late as the 1990's, such as Tupac Shakur rapping about how his homies that converted to Islam gave up on 'living large' for a more chaste lifestyle.
"Oh you a Muslim now, no more dope game / Heard you might be comin' home, just got bail / Wanna go to the Mosque, don't wanna chase females / I seems I lost my little homie he's a changed man / Hit the pen and now no sinnin' is the game plan." (1996)
It's easy to see how these stereotypes have shifted in the last few decades with waves of immigration reducing the proportion of African-American Muslims (although they still constitute almost 30% of Muslims in the USA) and the War on Terror demonizing the communities that have grown since.

A relevant tradition to meditate on:
- علي بن إبراهيم، عن محمد بن عيسى، عن بعض أصحابنا، عن أبي الحسن موسى عليه السلام قال: إن الله عز وجل غضب على الشيعة (1) فخيرني نفسي أوهم، فوقيتهم والله بنفسي.
Narrated by Imam Musa b. Ja’far [a], "Allah became angry with the Shi`a, so he gave me the choice between myself or them, so I redeemed them by Allah with my own self."
al-Majlisī suggests that it refers to a time where the Shīʿah had abandoned the practice of taqiyyah (dissimulation) during the reign of Hārun al-Rashīd (d. 763/766 or 809 AD) and as a result, al-Kāẓim had to put himself forward as a sacrifice in order to save them.

There are indeed different narrations on "the first creation". Remember that mashi'a is both fi`l and infi`al. When one says mashi'a, they are just using a substantive formulation to make a verb into a noun. Otherwise, the mashi'a is just Allah's act of willing (sha'a), a verb, and that action is sempiternal. So thus, narrations that say that the Muhammadan Light is the first creation mean that it is the first creation after the mashi'a. The mashi'a is the process that births every thing in the creation.
Is the mashi'a the same thing as the Muhammadan Light? The Muhammadan Light is the place (mahal) of the mashi'a. Imam `Ali (as) says in khutbat al-bayan, هو المكون ونحن المكان. He does not say نحن التكوين. So the answer is that the two are very closely related, like a glowing oil almost touched by fire but not quite (24:35).

There are indeed different narrations on "the first creation". Remember that mashi'a is both fi`l and infi`al. When one says mashi'a, they are just using a substantive formulation to make a verb into a noun. Otherwise, the mashi'a is just Allah's act of willing (sha'a), a verb, and that action is sempiternal. So thus, narrations that say that the Muhammadan Light is the first creation mean that it is the first creation after the mashi'a. The mashi'a is the process that births every thing in the creation.
Is the mashi'a the same thing as the Muhammadan Light? The Muhammadan Light is the place (mahal) of the mashi'a. Imam `Ali (as) says in khutbat al-bayan, هو المكون ونحن المكان. He does not say نحن التكوين. So the answer is that the two are very closely related, like a glowing oil almost touched by fire but not quite (24:35).

I agree with everything you said about Rebel media and Sun news. They're buffoons. I'm just posting the video because it is the most comprehensive video on YouTube on what happened in Toronto that day. I did not want to post multiple unprofessional videos of the event. I'm surprised that mainstream news has not been more vocal on this story.
http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-friday-edition-1.3786140/i-m-not-a-bigot-meet-the-u-of-t-prof-who-refuses-to-use-genderless-pronouns-1.3786144

At my alma mater, there was a protest in support of free speech, because Professor Jordan Peterson has refused to refer to students by the gender neutral pronoun "xe" instead of "he" or "she". So the feminists, leftists, and Black Lives Matter showed up with a white-noise machine, chanting "shame", pushing reporters, and throwing rubbish, trying to crash the event. This just goes to show that the radical left is just as loony as the radical right, forcing their perspective and harassing those who do not want their speech regulated. Using "xe" simply does not cross most of our minds, but this counter-protest felt otherwise.

This is not an argument for weak women, there is no women in my mind stronger than Fatima, Zaynab, Umm al-Baneen, Sakeena, Ruqayya, Khadija, Asiya, and Maryam. They all displayed strength in their life and were often killed or imprisoned for their strength. I have not said anywhere that women must be submissive, gentle, meek, or put up with male abuse. On the contrary, I acknowledged the outright misogyny of some pre-modern societies: preventing women from owning property (how is that any different from Fadak?), forcing women into marriages, having women pay dowries, having women put up with brutally violent husbands - all of this is haram and reprehensible.
The argument is not about women's rights, it's about feminist ideology, and third-wave feminism in particular. I'm arguing against a feminism that believes in free love, which is promoted by some of feminism's pioneers (Mary Nichols), and promoted by popular modern feminists like Steinem. I'm arguing against the idea that marriage and the patriarchy are a plot to keep women down, which is the position of Wollstonecraft. I'm arguing against a feminism that shames stay-at-home mothers as uneducated and brainwashed. I'm arguing against the simplistic idea that males are privileged just for being male, which leads to policies that customs that ignore the issues of our young men and boys. I'm against a raunchy feminism that would like to normalize female sexuality (the Vag.ina Monologues, #freethenipple campaign, slu.twalk, Femen) and legalize prostitution (Margo St. James, Norma Jean Almodovar, Kamala Kempadoo, Laura Maria Agustin, Annie Sprinkle, Carol Leigh, Carol Queen, Audacia Ray). I am against a feminism that enshrines discredited narrative over fact (the wage gap and rape culture). I am against an ideology that promotes the legalization of late-term abortion. I am against queer-focused, anti-nuclear family feminists that have sway over the LGBT and BLM movements. I am against a feminism that denies any biological, anatomical or psychological basis for gender, and promotes gender-fluidity, non-binary and nongendered identities. I am against any ideology that promotes censorship on campus or among academics; including the idea of a safe-space. There is a lot more to say, but as someone who works with young people, I can say that all of these ideas are very influential among millennials. Professors like Jordan Peterson are vocally fighting for their careers, just because they don't want to use non-gendered pronouns ("xe" instead of "she"). A professor who was a good friend of mine was laid off for similar reasons.
As for choosing education and work over marriage, that is up to the person. I can see the advantages of delaying marriage and having economic independence before and during marriage. Islam is quite flexible in this area, but it gives guidelines that we should think over, because it has our best interests in mind. InshaAllah we can talk more about that in another thread.

My post is focused mainly on how Western socio-political discourse occurs between two poles: (1) Freedom, and (2) Harm. This is the result of a long, crystallizing history. Islam may have areas of overlap with utilitarians and classical liberals, but overall the Islamic thesis puts God above everything else.
Regarding your point about jahiliyya: I can easily say that jahiliyya gave many freedoms to women that Islam removed. Jahiliyya had no penalties for fornicators, it had rights for prostitutes, it allowed women to marry a second husband to conceive a high-status son, it had female prophetesses, and it had female goddesses. Islam restricted all of this. Yes, Islam did give many additional rights to women, but my point is that Islam is not all about freedom and liberation. It is about accountability, responsibility, and duty. It freed some aspects of our lives, but it restricted others. Anyone who reads Islamic literature with feminist glasses will be surely disappointed.
As for your point that men in eastern culture "don't lift a finger when they are at home", that sounds like a gross generalization of billions of people and hundreds of cultures. Even if I were to concede that eastern men generally cook and clean less than their wives, they work longer hours, and a lot of the handiwork, lawn-mowing, technology fixing is done by men. Either way, it's not a competition. One shouldn't have a men vs women mindset, or even a victimized mindset. Men too are victims; they are the ones most effected by violence, suicide, work injuries, drugs, prisons, gangs, and dropping out of school... a victim mentality however would not solve these problems.
Islam = Submission in Arabic, it's not submission to men, it's submission to Allah. Submission in some cases will be the opposite of freedom, but I would argue that sincere submission to Allah frees you from your fears and your desires, and leads to a good and contented life.
I never said women should be slaves to men, or that womanhood is a disadvantage, or being dark-skinned (?) is bad. Men and women are simply different and have different rights and responsibilities in Islam. Islam is a sexually dimorphic religion. Women don't pay mahr, they don't pray/fast during their time of the month, they are not conscripted in wartime, they don't need to work, they don't need to divide their wealth, etc. By the same token, women have some unique laws and responsibilities. Total freedom and equality means removing every gendered law, including the ones that restrict men and free women, and vice versa. This is antithetical to our revelation.
Please don't call me dishonest or a male chauvinist just because of one respectful criticism of modern feminism. That type of spiteful namecalling won't get you much sympathy from a neutral reader. State your arguments respectfully.

My post is focused mainly on how Western socio-political discourse occurs between two poles: (1) Freedom, and (2) Harm. This is the result of a long, crystallizing history. Islam may have areas of overlap with utilitarians and classical liberals, but overall the Islamic thesis puts God above everything else.
Regarding your point about jahiliyya: I can easily say that jahiliyya gave many freedoms to women that Islam removed. Jahiliyya had no penalties for fornicators, it had rights for prostitutes, it allowed women to marry a second husband to conceive a high-status son, it had female prophetesses, and it had female goddesses. Islam restricted all of this. Yes, Islam did give many additional rights to women, but my point is that Islam is not all about freedom and liberation. It is about accountability, responsibility, and duty. It freed some aspects of our lives, but it restricted others. Anyone who reads Islamic literature with feminist glasses will be surely disappointed.
As for your point that men in eastern culture "don't lift a finger when they are at home", that sounds like a gross generalization of billions of people and hundreds of cultures. Even if I were to concede that eastern men generally cook and clean less than their wives, they work longer hours, and a lot of the handiwork, lawn-mowing, technology fixing is done by men. Either way, it's not a competition. One shouldn't have a men vs women mindset, or even a victimized mindset. Men too are victims; they are the ones most effected by violence, suicide, work injuries, drugs, prisons, gangs, and dropping out of school... a victim mentality however would not solve these problems.
Islam = Submission in Arabic, it's not submission to men, it's submission to Allah. Submission in some cases will be the opposite of freedom, but I would argue that sincere submission to Allah frees you from your fears and your desires, and leads to a good and contented life.
I never said women should be slaves to men, or that womanhood is a disadvantage, or being dark-skinned (?) is bad. Men and women are simply different and have different rights and responsibilities in Islam. Islam is a sexually dimorphic religion. Women don't pay mahr, they don't pray/fast during their time of the month, they are not conscripted in wartime, they don't need to work, they don't need to divide their wealth, etc. By the same token, women have some unique laws and responsibilities. Total freedom and equality means removing every gendered law, including the ones that restrict men and free women, and vice versa. This is antithetical to our revelation.
Please don't call me dishonest or a male chauvinist just because of one respectful criticism of modern feminism. That type of spiteful namecalling won't get you much sympathy from a neutral reader. State your arguments respectfully.

For example, some people are very fixed on the whiteness or maleness of a perpetrator of a crime, rather than the crime itself. Headlines should not be focused on "black people did this" or "Muslims did that" or "the patriarchy caused this".

For example, some people are very fixed on the whiteness or maleness of a perpetrator of a crime, rather than the crime itself. Headlines should not be focused on "black people did this" or "Muslims did that" or "the patriarchy caused this".

For example, some people are very fixed on the whiteness or maleness of a perpetrator of a crime, rather than the crime itself. Headlines should not be focused on "black people did this" or "Muslims did that" or "the patriarchy caused this".

A few reasons why the garden of Adam was not the same as the Jannah of the Hereafter:
1. Once you enter Jannah, you cannot leave, but Adam left.
2. There is no lying in Jannah (Surat Naba'), but Iblees lied about the tree.
3. There is nothing haram in Jannah, but Allah forbade the fruit of that tree.
4. There are no sins or mistakes in Jannah, but Adam disobeyed Allah.
So it's not the same Jannah. Adam's fall does not have to be a physical fall from a high place to the earth, because Jannah is not in the clouds or in space. Rather it was a spiritual fall, and Allah knows best.